Conrad Theodore Seitz

James Lee

Arlington, Texas

This astute column reflects the bizarre, unprecedented nature of the current election. Ms. Roller and the professional comedians analyze and evaluate Trump as if the ability to mix humor with character assassination belonged in the mental tool kit of every effective president.

Trump’s heavyhanded approach to humor, combined with his inability to laugh at himself, do reveal much about his character and intellect. His insults directed at women, for example, which focus on their physical appearance or bodily functions expose a mind too often unaware that effective humor targets a person’s behavior, not her physical characteristics. And his failure to understand the barbs directed at himself stem from his discomfort with the painful process of self reflection. Trump ranks as the ultimate extrovert, because a willingness to turn his pitiless gaze inward would not reveal much of substance.

The fact remains, however, that no one would have written a column on a previous candidate analyzing his ability to deliver artful insults. Since Trump has demonstrated an ignorance of key issues worthy of Sarah Palin, along with a gross inability to craft intelligent policies, perhaps his skill as an insult comedian remains the only criterion by which to judge his fitness for high office. This would be akin to evaluating an Olympic sprinter on his ability to trip a competitor.

Clearly, the framers failed to include in the Constitution all the necessary qualifications for president.

This comment was one of those attached to an article about Drumpf (Trump) and his “insult comedy.” in the New York Times.

Here, in New York Magazine, is an insightful article showing the similarities between Ronald Reagan, during his campaign, and the Donald– a Donald/Ronald comparison, if you will.

I can’t type very well because I have a bandage on my left index (second) finger as a result of a six-year-old’s attempt to cut of the tip of my finger with pruning shears, so I will just be pointing you to interesting arftgicles forf a while…

An item about the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow caught my eye– it was from the Washington Post, one of the media outlets that Donald has banned from his press box– and the Post laid bare Donald’s cozy relationship with Russia’s strong man.  It’s no wonder Donald doesn’t like the Post.

Here’s an excerpt from the piece that explains why Donald loves Putin so much:

The dynamic illustrates the extent to which Trump’s worldview has been formed through the lens of commerce rather than the think tanks, government deliberations and international diplomatic conferences that typically shape the foreign policy positions of presidential candidates.
It also reflects Trump’s willingness to see other world leaders through his own personal connections. In a Republican Party in which an ability to stand up to Putin has been seen as a test of toughness, Trump’s relationship with the Russian leader is instead one of mutual flattery. Putin said in December that Trump was a “colorful and talented” person, a compliment that Trump said at the time was an “honor.”
The back-and-forth has continued. In a rally Thursday night, Trump cited those comments as the reason he will not reject the Russian leader. “A guy calls me a genius and I’m going to renounce?” Trump said. “I’m not going to renounce him.” On Friday in St. Petersburg, Putin again called Trump a “colorful person” and said he welcomed Trump’s proposal for a “full-scale resumption” of U.S.-Russian ties.
On the campaign trail, Trump has called for a new partnership with Moscow. He has called for overhauling NATO, the allied military force seen as the chief protector of pro-Western nations near Russia. And Trump has surrounded himself with a team of advisers who have had financial ties to Russia.

It’s simple: Donald loves Putin because Putin gave him money and flattered him.  What could be simpler?  A financial tie, a bribe if you will.  The only reason the Supreme Court believes that judges should recuse themselves from court cases: because they have money to gain or lose from the relationship.

There’s nothing complicated about Donald.  He loves money, almost as much as he loves beautiful women, maybe even more.

Would you want someone so easily swayed by flattery and cash advances to be your president?  No, I didn’t think so.  In fact, there’s something slimy about the whole business.  There’s something slimy about an electoral process that costs six billion dollars (the estimated total expenditure, by both sides, in the 2016 elections.)  How could anyone believe in the moral probity, the courage, or the selflessness of a candidate who paid his way into office?

Fortunately for the free world, Donald doesn’t have enough money to buy his way into the presidency.  In fact, he doesn’t have enough money to be anything more than mayor of New York, and I don’t think even if he saturated the City with ads and canvassers, that he would have a chance.  New Yorkers know him too well.

I’m not a New Yorker (I was born in San Francisco) but I admire the courage of anyone who could live in the Big Apple.  That’s why I read the New York Times, which Donald hasn’t yet banned from his press entourage (although it is close, as Donald personally told a NYT reporter.)  The fact that Donald lives there is just one of the risks that you have to take if you want to live in one of the two or three biggest cities in the world.